ArticleUrolithiasis2024
Predicting urinary stone recurrence: a joint model analysis of repeated 24-hour urine collections from the MSTONE database.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Adherence to medical management of kidney stones: A systematic review.Urolithiasis · 2026Pooled it
- Joint analysis of longitudinal and recurrent event data: A functional regression approach with autoregressive frailty.Statistical methods in medical research · 2026Article
- Relationship between serum glucose-to-albumin ratio and kidney stones among nondiabetic U.S. adults: a population-based study.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- The Role of Diet in Kidney Stone Pathogenesis and Prevention.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- Impact of preoperative double-J stent placement on stone recurrence following flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To address the limitations in existing urinary stone recurrence (USR) models, including failure to account for changes in 24-hour urine (24U) parameters over time and ignoring multiplicity of stone recurrences, we presented a novel statistical method to jointly model temporal trends in 24U parameters and multiple recurrent stone events. The MSTONE database spanning May 2001 to April 2015 was analyzed. A joint recurrent model was employed, combining a linear mixed-effects model for longitudinal 24U parameters and a recurrent event model with a dynamic first-order Autoregressive (AR(1)) structure. A mixture cure component was included to handle patient heterogeneity. Comparisons were made with existing methods, multivariable Cox regression and conditional Prentice-Williams-Peterson regression, both applied to established nomograms. Among 396 patients (median follow-up of 2.93 years; IQR, 1.53-4.36 years), 34.6% remained free of stone recurrence throughout the study period, 30.0% experienced a single recurrence, and 35.4% had multiple recurrences. The joint recurrent model with a mixture cure component identified significant associations between 24U parameters - including urine pH (adjusted HR = 1.991; 95% CI 1.490-2.660; p < 0.001), total volume (adjusted HR = 0.700; 95% CI 0.501-0.977; p = 0.036), potassium (adjusted HR = 0.983; 95% CI 0.974-0.991; p < 0.001), uric acid (adjusted HR = 1.528; 95% CI 1.105-2.113, p = 0.010), calcium (adjusted HR = 1.164; 95% CI 1.052-1.289; p = 0.003), and citrate (adjusted HR = 0.796; 95% CI 0.706-0.897; p < 0.001), and USR, achieving better predictive performance compared to existing methods. 24U parameters play an important role in prevention of USR, and therefore, patients with a history of stones are recommended to closely monitor for future recurrence by regularly conducting 24U tests.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.